UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH

* * *

NONPRESCRIPTION DRUGS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (NDAC)

IN JOINT SESSION WITH THE

ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH DRUGS (ACRHD)

* * *

MEETING

* * *

TUESDAY,

DECEMBER 16, 2003

      The joint Advisory Committees met at 8:00 a.m in the Grand Ballroom of the Gaithersburg Hilton, 620 Perry Parkway, Gaithersburg, Maryland, Dr. Louis Cantilena, Jr., NDAC Chairman, presiding.

PRESENT:

LOUIS R. CANTILENA, Jr., M.D., Ph.D., NDAC Chairman

LINDA C. GIUDICE, M..D., Ph.D., ACRHD Chair

MICHAEL C. ALFANO, D.M.D., Ph.D., Acting Industry Representative

PRESENT (Continued):

NEAL L. BENOWITZ, M.D., NDAC

ABBEY B. BERENSON, M.D., Consultant (Voting)

TERRENCE F. BLASCHKE, M.D., NDAC

LESLIE CLAPP, M.D., NDAC

SUSAN A CROCKETT, M.D, ACRHD

FRANK F. DAVIDOFF, M.D., NDAC

SCOTT S. EMERSON, M.D., Ph.D., ACRHD

MICHAEL F.  GREENE, M.D., Consultant (Voting)

W. DAVID HAGER, M.D., ACRHD

GERI D. HEWITT, M.D., Consultant (Voting)

JULIE A. JOHNSON, Pharm.D., NDAC

Y.W. FRANCIS LAM, Pharm.D., NDAC

VIVIAN LEWIS, M.D., ACRHD

LARRY LIPSHULTZ, M.D., ACRHD

CHARLES J. LOCKWOOD, M.D., ACRHD

GEORGE A. MACONES, M.D., ACRHD

SONIA PATTEN, Ph.D., NDAC Consumer Representative

VALERIE MONTGOMERY RICE, M.D., ACRHD

WAYNE R. SNODGRASS, M.D., Ph.D., NDAC

JOSEPH STANFORD, M.D., ACRHD

MARY E. TINETTI, M.D., NDAC

 

PRESENT (Continued):

JAMES TRUSSELL, Ph.D., Consultant (Voting)

LORRAINE TULMAN, RN, M.S., ACRHD Consumer Representative

DONALD L. UDEN, Pharm.D., NDAC

HENRY W. WILLIAMS, Jr., M.D., NDAC

ALASTAIR WOOD, M.D., NDAC

KAREN M. TEMPLETON-SOMERS, Ph.D., NDAC Executive Secretary

 

SPONSOR REPRESENTATIVES AND CONSULTANTS:

CAROLE BEN-MAIMON, M.D.

VIVIAN DICKERSON, M.D.

DAVID GRIMES, M.D.

FDA REPRESENTATIVES:

STEVEN K. GALSON, M.D., M.P.H., Acting Director, CDER

SANDRA KWEDER, M.D., Deputy Director, OND

JONCA BULL, M.D., Director, ODE V

JULIE BEITZ, M.D., Deputy Director, ODE III

DONNA GRIEBEL, M.D., Deputy Director, DRUDP

CURTIS J. ROSEBRAUGH, M.D., M.P.H., Deputy Director, DOTCDP

ANDREA LEONARD SEGAL, Team Leader,

JIN CHEN, M.D., Ph.D., Medical Officer, DOTCDP

DANIEL DAVIS, M.D., M.P.H., Medical Officer, DRUDP

KAREN LECHTER, J.D., Ph.D., Social Science Analyst, DSRCS

 

 

 

                   C O N T E N T S

Introductions .................................... 6

Conflict of Interest Statement .................. 12

Opening Remarks, Dr. Sandra Kweder .............. 13

Introduction to the Issues, Dr. Curtis

      Rosebraugh ................................ 20

Sponsor Presentation:

      Dr. Carole Ben-Maimon ............. 26, 40, 64

      Dr. Vivian Dickerson ...................... 33

      Dr. David Grimes .......................... 59

 

FDA Presentation:

 

      Dr. Daniel Davis .......................... 98

      Dr. Karen Lechter ........................ 114

      Dr. Jin Chen ............................. 124

 

Open Public Hearing:

 

      Dr. Melanie Gold ......................... 155

      Dr. Vanessa Cullins ...................... 157

      Dr. Gretchen Stuart ...................... 160

      Delegate Bob Marshall .................... 162

      Rachel Laser ............................. 165

      Dr. Felicia Stewart ...................... 167

      Wendy Wright ............................. 169

      Linda Freeman ............................ 171

      Carole Denner ............................ 176

      Erin Mahoney ............................. 179

      Teresa Harrison .......................... 180

      Dr. Hanna Klaus .......................... 182

      Kirsten Moore ............................ 185

      Dr. Beth Jordan .......................... 185

      Dr. Robert Carroll ....................... 188

      Dr. Janet Engle .......................... 189

      Hillary Flowers .......................... 192

      Kelly Mangan ............................. 194

      Dr. John Bruchalski ...................... 195

      Dr. Chris Kahlenborn ..................... 197

      Dr. Daniel Hussar ........................ 199

      Heather Boonstra ......................... 202

 

 

 

             C O N T E N T S (Continued)

 

                                                PAGE

 

Open Public Hearing (Continued):

 

      Dr. William Colliton ..................... 204

      Karen Coleman ............................ 206

      Alexandra Leader ......................... 208

      Amy Allina ............................... 210

      Judie Brown .............................. 212

      Stephanie Seguin ......................... 214

      Jane Boggess ............................. 216

      Silvia Henriquez ......................... 218

      Vera Brown ............................... 220

      Carol Petraitis .......................... 222

      Erika Gubrium ............................ 224

      Jill Stanek .............................. 226

      Kim Gandy ................................ 228

      Deven McGraw ............................. 230

      Andre Ulmann ............................. 232

      Dr. Erin Gainer .......................... 233

      Candi Churchill .......................... 235

      Jennifer Taylor .......................... 238

      Rev. Robert Tiller ....................... 240

      Dr. Albert George Thomas ................. 242

 

Clarifying Questions from Committee ............ 246

 

Question for the Committee ..................... 301

 


                P R O C E E D I N G S

                                         (8:05 a.m.)

            CHAIRMAN CANTILENA:  Good morning, everyone.  We'd like to get started.

            I'd like to welcome you to the December 16th, 2003, meeting of the  Nonprescription Drugs Advisory Committee and jointly with the Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee.

            We're here today to discuss the proposition of switching Plan B from Rx to over-the-counter, and before we get started, Dr. Somers has a statement that she needs to read for all of us.

            DR. TEMPLETON-SOMERS:  Good morning, and welcome to this joint session of the Nonprescription Drugs Advisory Committee and the Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs.

            All committee members have been provided with copies of background materials from both the sponsor and the FDA and with copies of the letters from the public that were received by the December 5th deadline.  The background materials were posted on the FDA Web site yesterday morning.

            Copies of all of these materials are available for viewing only at the FDA desk outside this room.

            Today we have a very large table, a full house, and an exciting topic.  So we'd like to start with a few rules of order. 

            FDA relies on its advisory committees to provide the best possible scientific advice available to assist us in making complex decisions.  We understand that issues raised during the meeting may well lead to conversations over breaks or during lunch.

            However, one of the benefits of an Advisory Committee meeting is that the discussions take place in an open and public forum.  To that end, we request sincerely that members of the committee not engage in private, off-record conversations or interviews on today's topic during the breaks or during lunch. 

            Whenever there is an important topic to be discussed, there are a variety of opinions.  One of our goals today is for this meeting to be conducted in a fair and open way where every participant is listened to carefully, treated with dignity, courtesy, and respect.  Anybody whose behavior is disruptive to the meeting will be asked to leave.

            We are confident that everyone here is sensitive to these issues and can appreciate that these comments are intended as a gentle reminder.  We look forward to a productive and interesting meeting.

            Thank you.

            CHAIRMAN CANTILENA:  Okay, and as I said earlier, my name is Dr. Lou Cantilena, head of clinical pharmacology at the Uniformed Services University.  I'll be chairing this meeting.

            And we'd like to go around so that everyone can introduce themselves, and we'll start on this side.

            DR. ALFANO:  Michael Alfano, Dean of the Dental School at New York University.

            DR. HAGER:  David Hager, Reproductive Health Drugs, from the University of Kentucky.

            DR. LAM:  Francis Lam from University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio, a member of NDAC.

            DR. LIPSHULTZ:  Larry Lipshultz, Professor of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine.

            DR. JOHNSON:  Julie Johnson from University of Florida Colleges of Pharmacy and Medicine, from the Nonprescription Drug Committee.

            DR. MACONES:  George Macones.  I'm Associate Professor of OB-GYN and Epidemiology at the University of Pennsylvania on Reproductive Drugs.

            DR. PATTEN:  Sonia Patten.  I'm a consumer representative.  I'm an anthropologist on faculty at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota, and I'm part of the Nonprescription Drug Committee.

            DR. CROCKETT;  I'm Susan Crockett.  I'm a general OB-GYN Director of Maternity Services for the CHRISTUS Santa Rosa Family Practice Residency Program, and I'm a member of the Reproductive Health Drugs Committee.

            DR. UDEN:  I'm Don Uden, a professor at the University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy and member of NDAC.

            DR. STANFORD:  Joseph Stanford, University of Utah, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine on the Reproductive Health Drugs Committee.

            DR. BENOWITZ:  Neal Benowitz.  I'm an internist and clinical pharmacologist from U.C., San Francisco, on the Nonprescription Drug Committee.

            DR. LOCKWOOD:  Charles Lockwood, Chair of OB-GYN at Yale and Reproductive Drugs.

            MS. TULMAN:  Lorraine Tulman, Associate Professor, University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, Reproductive Health Advisory Group, and I'm the consumer representative for that group.

            DR. TRUSSELL:  James Trussell from the Office of Population Research at Princeton University.

            DR. GIUDICE:  Linda Giudice, reproductive endocrinologist and Professor of OB-GYN at  Stanford University, and  Chair of the Reproductive Health Drugs Committee.

            DR. TINETTI:  Mary Tinetti, Department of Medicine, Yale, Nonprescription Drug Committee.

            DR. HEWITT:  I'm Geri Hewitt, Assistant Professor of the Department of OB-GYN and Department of Pediatrics at Ohio State College of Medicine.

            DR. GREENE:   I'm Michael Greene, Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology at Harvard Medical School.

            DR. CLAPP:  Leslie Clapp, pediatrician, Buffalo, New York, and Clinical Associate Professor of Pediatrics, University of Buffalo.

            DR. SNODGRASS:  Wayne Snodgrass, Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas in Galveston, and clinical pharmacology on the Nonprescription Drug Committee.

            DR. LEWIS:  Vivian Lewis, Professor of OB-GYN at University of Rochester, and I'm on the Reproductive Health Drugs Committee.

            DR. BLASCHKE:  Terry Blaschke, internist/clinical pharmacologist, Stanford.

            DR. WOOD:  I'm Alastair Wood from Department of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology at Vanderbilt, and I'm on NDAC.

            DR. EMERSON:  Scott Emerson, Professor of Biostatistics at the University of Washington on Reproductive Drugs.

            DR. BERENSON:  Abbey Berenson, Professor of OB-GYN and Pediatrics at University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston.

            DR. DAVIDOFF:  I am Frank Davidoff.  I'm the editor emeritus of the Annals of Internal Medicine; also now the executive editor at the Institute for Health Care Improvement, and I'm on the NDAC.

            DR. MONTGOMERY:  Valerie Montgomery Rice, Professor and Chair of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Meharry Medical College, and I'm on the Reproductive Health Drugs.

            DR. GRIEBEL:  Donna Griebel, Deputy, Division of Repro. and Urologic Drug Products, FDA.

            DR. ROSEBRAUGH:  Curt Rosebraugh, Deputy of Over-the-Counter Drug Products.

            DR. BEITZ:  Julie Beitz, Deputy Director, Office of Drug Evaluation III, CDER, FDA.

            DR. BULL:  Good morning.  Jonca Bull, the Director of the Office of Drug Evaluation IV in CDER, FDA.

            DR. GALSON:  Steve Galson.  I'm the Acting Director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

            DR. KWEDER:  I'm Sandra Kweder.  I'm the Deputy Director of the Office of New Drugs in CDER.

            DR. TEMPLETON-SOMERS:  Thank you.  I'm Karen Templeton-Somers, Executive Secretary to the Committee, FDA.

            And the following announcement addresses conflict of interest issues with respect to this meeting and is made a part of the record to preclude even the appearance of impropriety at the meeting.

            The conflict of interest statutes prohibit special government employees from participating in matters that could affect their own or their employer's financial interests.  All participants have been screened for interests related to the product, competing products and companies that could be affected by today's discussions  The agency has reviewed the interests reported by the committee participants and has determined that there is no potential for a conflict of interest at this meeting.

            We would like to disclose that Dr. Michael Alfano is participating as the acting industry representative, acting on behalf of Regulated Industry.

            In the event the discussions involve any other products or firms not already on the agenda for which FDA participants have a financial interest, the participants are aware of the need to exclude themselves from such involvement, and their exclusion will be noted for the record.

            With respect to all other participants, we ask in the interest of fairness that they address any current or previous financial involvement with any firm whose products they may wish to comment upon.

            Thank you.

            CHAIRMAN CANTILENA:  Thank you, Dr. Somers.

            We'll now hear from Dr. Sandy Kweder, who will open the meeting for the FDA.

            DR. KWEDER:  Well, good morning, everyone, and welcome.  I'd first like to start off the meeting by acknowledging the large size of the panel today and thanking all of you on the panel for coming here.  Sometimes a large panel makes interchange more difficult, but I think Dr. Cantilena is probably up to the challenge.

            Your discussion is extremely important to us, but before you begin that, I'd like to provide some background perspective as to how we got here.

            Following my remarks, Dr. Curt Rosebraugh will introduce the subject in more detail and get on with some of the scientific presentations.

            First, let me be clear that we're here today to discuss the scientific data available to address Barr Lab's application to remove the prescription requirement for their product Plan B.  Plan B is an emergency contraceptive that is indicated for use in the unexpected circumstance when another standard contraceptive method fails or fails to be used. 

            While previously established safety and efficacy data for this medication will be referenced, you'll be asked to consider these data only as they relate to Plan B's suitability for nonprescription status.  You'll hear a lot more about FDA's general approach to making decisions about switches from prescription to nonprescription status.  So I'm not going to address that further.

            But, secondly, I would like to assure you that we at FDA recognize the broad array of issues related to emergency contraception, in general, that may arise in your discussion.  None of these are new.

            In June of 2000, FDA, CDER particularly, held a Part 15 hearing.  The purpose of that two-day hearing was solely to solicit public testimony on the future of prescription to nonprescription product shifts.  We requested that experts and any concerned member of the public come and share their perspectives in several areas.

            What products should and should not be considered for nonprescription status?

            What are the perceived incentives and perceived barriers to such shifts?

            And outstanding issues, what are they that might be addressed to modify incentives and barriers?

            I was part of the FDA panel listening to that testimony.  In addition to other product groups discussed, like cholesterol lowering agents, non-sedating antihistamines and antihypertensives, we heard several hours of testimony regarding oral contraceptives as potential candidates for being available without a prescription, but in particular, many speakers favored or did not favor making emergency contraception nonprescription.

            Those in the favoring group pointed out that the clinical safety of the product and the importance of access to emergency contraception are the keys to maximizing its effectiveness.  For example, if the product is to be used as directed, the woman must be able to take it within 72 hours of intercourse.  This is often not achievable given our current system of pharmacy practice.

            They also cited studies in the literature which showed that women do not appear to substitute emergency contraception for other more traditional forms of contraception.

            Those who did not favor nonprescription status raised public health concerns about potential effects of wider availability of the product on adolescent health and behavior.  For example, these speakers did not find the published literature convincing with regard to the impact of more readily available emergency contraceptives on adolescent behavior.  Of particular concern to them were whether nonprescription access would increase sexually transmitted infections and decrease the use of other more effective contraceptives or even affect choices about sexual behavior in adolescent groups.

            We at FDA understand the complexity and the multiple perspectives on these matters.  We will consider their full breadth before arriving at any final regulatory decision following this meeting.

            Finally, I want to say a few words about seeking answers to difficult questions and decision making.  One of the things that we at FDA do when we're faced with one is we often look to others' experiences to see what has happened with those who have gone before us.

            For example, we look to the experience of products as they may be marketed in other countries.  Some of those experiences may come up today in the presentations and your discussions.  You may be reassured by these or frustrated because there are not detailed data to answer questions you might like to have addressed.

            Please keep in mind that considering the effects of nonprescription or prescription medicines in countries other than the United States is fraught with challenges of interpretation because of differences in pharmacy models.

            For example in some countries having things, what might be called behind the country, only means that a person has to ask for them.  For example, in those countries this status is applied to hundreds of medicines.  The open shelves in the shop are there only for toiletries and other supplies. 

            In these countries, including many in Europe, most of the products that we routinely consider over-the-counter and readily available even in a grocery store are distributed in this manner at a pharmacist's counter, as are many products that we are used to only having available by prescription.

            In other countries, the term "behind the counter" refers to the need to request the product of a pharmacist and obtain or have the opportunity to be counseled by a pharmacist.

            The bottom line is that data from these countries can only be looked at from an arm's length, and they do not necessarily translate into data that give solid answers to bigger picture questions that we or you may have.  We just have to do the best we can.

            Again, thank you for coming and for your willingness to help us with a challenging decision.  Discussions at these meetings are as important, if not more important, than any vote tally on the formal questions that we pose, and we're looking forward to your discussion today.

            Thank you.

            CHAIRMAN CANTILENA:  Okay.  Thank you, Dr. Kweder.

            Dr. Rosebraugh, would you like to continue with the FDA introduction, please?

            DR. ROSEBRAUGH:  Good morning.  On behalf of the Divisions of Over-the-Counter Drug Products and Reproductive and Urologic Drug Products, I'd like to welcome the members of each respective Advisory Committee to today's meeting regarding the nonprescription status of Plan B.

            By way of introduction, I would like to briefly go over the regulatory history of Plan B, go over the regulatory requirements for nonprescription marketing of drug products, and outline today's agenda.

            Plan B was approved for prescription use on July 28th, 1999, for the indication as an emergency contraception to be used to prevent pregnancy following unprotected intercourse or a known or suspected contraceptive failure.  Prescription directions for use indicate that to obtain optimal efficacy, the first does needs to be taken as soon as possible within 72 hours of intercourse, and the second dose needs to be taken 12 hours later.

            Women's Capitol Corporation, the applicant for the original prescription NDA, submitted an application for Plan B switch from prescription to nonprescription status in April of 2003.  As the efficacy of Plan B, when used as per directed has already been established and the sponsor is not seeking a new indication or dosage regimen, this will not be a topic at today's meeting.

            However, the efficacy based on a use in a nonprescription setting is of interest to us. 

            The purpose of today's Advisory Committee meeting is to determine whether Plan B meets regulatory requirements for nonprescription marketing.

            Regarding nonprescription requirements or requirements for nonprescription marketing, the Durham-Humphrey Amendment to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which was enacted in 1951, formally differentiates between prescription and nonprescription drugs.  This is articulated in the Code of Federal Regulations 21 CFR 310-200(b) and states, "Any drug limited to prescription use under Section 503(b)(1)(C) of the Act shall be exempt from prescription dispensing requirements when the Commissioner finds such requirements are not necessary for the protection of public health by reason of the drug's toxicity or other potentialities for harmful effects, the method of its use, or the collateral measures necessary to its use, and he finds that the drug is safe and effective for use in self-medication as directed in the proposed labeling."

            So the bottom line is this regulation provides that a drug be sold nonprescription if it is safe and if adequate directions for use can be written that are discernable to a lay person.

            When approaching a possible prescription to nonprescription switch candidate, there are several questions that the agency takes into consideration to assess whether the product is, indeed, a suitable switch candidate.  Regarding the questions that we take into consideration, we wonder if the product has an acceptable safety margin, as demonstrated from prior prescription marketing experience; whether it has low misuse and abuse potential, a reasonable therapeutic index of safety; whether the condition that it is being used for can be adequately self-recognized and self-treated with minimal health care provider intervention; whether the benefits outweigh the risks; and when the product used under nonprescription conditions, is it safe and effective?

            If the answer to the above questions are yes, then the proposed product may meet regulatory requirements for nonprescription safety and effectiveness and is a candidate for consideration of nonprescription marketing.

            In order to address the questions that face switch candidates, the Plan B switch NDA application components included summaries from previously existing data and newly conducted studies.  To address the safety profile and misuse and abuse potential of the product, the sponsor has submitted safety data from their original NDA and a review of post marketing safety, both foreign and domestic, and a review of the published literature.

            To evaluate consumers' ability to self-recognize the condition they are treating and whether self-treatment with the product is safe, the sponsor has conducted label comprehension and actual use studies.  We will be hearing greater detail about these things during this morning's presentations.

            This type of data and the studies that the sponsor has performed are consistent with other submissions that have been evaluated in the past where the switch did not involve a change in dosage or indication.

            To review today's agenda, we will begin with a presentation by the sponsor, and that will be followed by a question and answer session.

            Then following a break, we will have presentations by the FDA.  Dr. Dan Davis will be presenting the FDA's review of safety.  Dr. Karen Lechter will be presenting the FDA's review of the label comprehension study, and Dr. Jin Chen will be presenting the FDA's review of actual use studies and the literature review.

            That will then be followed by a question and answer session of the FDA. 

            We will then have an open public hearing, then a much deserved lunch, and finally we will dedicate the afternoon to the panel discussion.

            During the presentations the joint committee members should consider the information and use the question and answer session to prepare to answer the questions posed to the committee regarding the possible prescription-to-nonprescription switch of Plan B.

            With that as a background, the agency looks forward to today's discussion.

            CHAIRMAN CANTILENA:  Thank you, Dr. Rosebraugh.

            Okay.  At this time we will  move to the sponsor presentation, which will be led by Dr. Ben-Maimon from Barr.

            Dr. Maimon, if you would start and then as you go through you can introduce the other members of your team.

            For the committee, we'll hold our questions until the end of sponsor presentation.

            Thank you.

            DR. BEN-MAIMON:  Good morning, everybody.  I'd like to start by just thanking the panel, the FDA, for giving us this opportunity to present the data supporting the prescription to over-counter switch.  We're all very interested, as the FDA stated, in hearing the panel's discussion and comments, and of course, interested in answering as many of the questions as we possibly can.

            I'm Carole Ben-Maimon, President/COO of Barr research. 

            You may have heard that Barr Laboratories has signed a letter of intent to acquire the assets of Women's Capitol Corporation.  That includes Plan B for emergency contraception.  That transaction has not yet closed, and so today I'm actually representing Women's Capitol Corporation.

            A little bit about what I'm going to cover in the presentation today.  First, the background, a little bit of an overview, and a discussion about how Plan B prevents pregnancy.  I'll talk a little bit about the rationale for the over-the-counter switch, try and not duplicate what was already said, and then I'm going to turn the podium over to Dr. Vivian Dickerson, who is the President-elect for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, for her to discuss with you the benefit-risk assessment as ACOG sees it.

            I'll return to the podium and give you some background on our clinical trials, the label comprehension and actual use, and then Dr. David Grimes, Vice President of Biomedical Affairs at Family Health International and clinical professor at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, will give a presentation and discuss the health consequences of an OTC switch for Plan B.

            Finally, I'll return to the podium and discuss with you our CARE Program, which many of you saw in the briefing document.  That program is really designed to increase access and awareness, as well as availability of Plan B, and I'll discuss some of the rationale and the presentation for that.

            What is emergency contraception?  Emergency contraception is therapy for women who desire prevention of pregnancy, have had unprotected sexual intercourse, including contraceptive failures and sexual assault.

            It's really important that we look at this in the context of what's going on in this country today.  Fifty-three percent of unintended pregnancies occur in women who are using contraceptives.  These are method failures or user failures, condoms that break, slip, women who miss their pills, but clearly, 53 percent of the unintended pregnancies are in women who have been using contraceptives.

            Unplanned pregnancies are a major health care problem in this country.  There are over three million unintended pregnancies in the United States each year.  With typical use, 15 percent of women who are using condoms will be become pregnant each year and eight percent of those using oral contraceptives will become pregnant each year.

            Half of the unintended pregnancies in this country will result in abortion.  It is estimated that up to 50 percent of these pregnancies could be prevented with greater access and use of emergency contraception. 

            There are two approved products today in the United States:  Preven, which was approved in 1998, and Plan B, which you already heard was approved in 1999.

            I hope they're not putting you to sleep.

            Preven is a combination product with an ethinyl estradiol, and Plan B is actually just a levonorgestrel product, a progestin only product, and that's really of significance as we get into how these products prevent pregnancy.

            But you can see that the regimens are essentially identical.  Both have to be taken within 72 hours of the active unprotected sexual intercourse, and the second tablet has to be taken 12 hours later.

            The most fertile days of the female cycle, the menstrual cycle, are the five days leading up to ovulation and then 24 hours after, and within 24 hours of ovulation, the egg is no longer viable and fertilization cannot occur.

            Plan B works like other progestin only oral contraceptives and prevents ovulation.  Plan B is an oral contraceptive, not an abortion pill.  The direct evidence is highly in favor of the fact that the primary mechanism of action, if not the sole mechanism of action, is prevention of ovulation.

            There are two hypothetical mechanisms that have been proposed:  interference with fertilization and interference with implantation, but for levonorgestrel only contraceptives, levonorgestrel only emergency contraceptives, there is no data to suggest that either of these are impacted, either of these events are affected by Plan B.

            Again, I would reiterate Plan B works by preventing ovulation.  It is an oral contraceptive, not an abortion pill.

            What's really critical when we consider the over-the-counter switch of Plan B is this chart, and what this is is the data from the efficacy trial that was included in the original NDA that supported the approval of the prescription drug product, and this was the WHO study that was done in the late '90s.

            And what it shows is that if Plan B, if the first tablet is taken within 24 hours of the active unprotected sex, the pregnancy rate is as low as .4 percent.  Many of you may know that with a single act of mid-cycle sex the pregnancy rate is about eight percent.  So clearly, the reduction is significant within the first 24 hours.

            If a woman waits until 48 to 72 hours, the pregnancy rate rises to 2.7 percent.  It is imperative that women have access to this product quickly so that they can maximize its effect.

            What does the prescription requirement do?  Well, it creates delays.  The woman needs to identify the need, clearly a need that is easily identified by most women given the fact that they have either had a contraceptive failure, coercive sex or rape, or unprotected sex.

            They need to then locate a prescriber who is willing to prescribe emergency contraception for them.  Again, we can't forget that most of these events are not occurring between nine to five Monday to Friday.  They're occurring at night and on weekends, and so this is not always an easy undertaking.

            They have to call the prescriber.  They have to talk to the prescriber.  The prescriber then has to call them back and decide to prescribe the product.

            If a woman does not have a physician that she sees regularly or somebody that follows her regularly, the doctor may want for them to come into the office and be examined because clearly, doctors are reticent sometimes to calling in prescriptions to patients who they don't know and probably for good reason.

            And so once she gets her prescription, she now has to go to pharmacy, and at the pharmacy I can tell you and will show you data to support this, not a lot of pharmacies stock this product, and the reason is the volume and the demand are quite low to date because awareness is low.  So just finding a pharmacy where she can obtain the product in a timely fashion can also be a challenge.

            And finally, she can purchase the product.  So the prescription setting actually creates significant barriers and time delays as we go through the process.

            With that, I'm going to turn the podium over to Dr. Dickerson.  Dr. Dickerson is President-elect of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.  She is the Director of Obstetrics and

Gynecology at the University of California Irvine Medical Center, and with that, Dr. Dickerson.

            DR. DICKERSON:  Good morning.  My name is Vivian Dickerson, and I am an Associate Professor at the University of California-Irvine and Director of the General OB-GYN Division at UCI Medical Center.

            I have no financial interests or potential conflicts of interest to disclose in this case.

            As President-elect of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, I am representing ACOG in support of over-the-counter status for Plan B.  The college rarely presents product specific testimony.  However, we are delighted to have the opportunity to present today because we strongly believe that Plan B meets the FDA criteria for over-the-counter status, and because there is a public health imperative to increase access to emergency contraception.

            ACOG's mission is to improve health care of women.  We pursue that mission through education and advocacy.  On behalf of ACOG, a national organization representing over 45,000 members who provide health care for women, I am speaking today to encourage the FDA to act favorably and quickly on the Women's Capitol Corporation/Barr Laboratories application to make Plan B available to women over the counter.

            Plan B is safe, and it is effective.  It is not teratogenic.  It has no potential for overdose or addiction.  It does not require special medical screening.  It is easy to use, and the labeling instructions are clear and understandable.

            We know that Plan B works.  It prevents pregnancy.  By preventing unintended pregnancy, it also prevents abortion. 

            We know that women use it correctly and are very unlikely to substitute it for an ongoing method of birth control.  For these reasons, ACOG supports the removal of the prescription requirement for Plan B for all women of reproductive age.